injuryupdate
30-07-2004, 08:36 PM
Although it will cost him a lot of money, this website would like to award a medal to David Millar for honesty, with the genuine belief that he actually has increased his credibility with his admission. Millar, who won last year's world time trial, has admitted to having taking the banned drug EPO, despite having not been caught by any drug test. Read more at Foxsports. Even though he was being interviewed by police, he could have protested his innocence and maintained his world championship, but it is likely that his title will be stripped and awarded to Australian Michael Rogers. Pathetic elements of the Australian media will now claim another world champion, but instead should be asking the hard questions. What is the likelihood that any of the top half-dozen riders in the race was NOT taking EPO? In our opinion, very low. Cycling almost cynically admits that EPO cannot be controlled and to prevent deaths from occurring, institutes a cut-off level for blood hematocrit. For a sport where it is assumed that EPO use is rife, and where controls are in place to limit its use (but not prevent it), what is the point of stripping a rider of a championship when he admits a year later that he was taking EPO? What is the point of banning the drug at all unless riders taking it can be caught? The best thing for cycling would be if the second, third and fourth place riders all admitted they were using EPO and the rule book would need to be re-written. However, cynicism and self-interest is likely to be upheld, David Millar's confession notwithstanding.